The Star Trek Into Darkness teaser trailer is here!

[Trekker4747]

EJD1984 wrote:

---

I just realized that as well!! Woo Hoo!!!!!

There's time, they can be added in post. There were some implied lens flares for sure.

[Aeolusdallas]

OneBuckFilms wrote:

---

Actually, there is strong precedent in Canon.

Voyager had no issues with Fluidic Space.

And the Enterprise in The Immunity Syndrome was essentially swimming inside a giant amoeba, certainly a liquid environment roughly analogous to water.

The functioning within a 1G environment is slightly more problematic, until you realize that a starship is travelling at warp velocities, and has survived close proximity to far more intense gravitationally induced stresses, to the point of surviving time travel.

Also in TOS they had an entire city floating on antigravity. They were impressed but not flabbergasted by it. Also in TNG they showed Galaxy class ships being build on Mars

[Sindatur]

Prancer the Sith wrote:

---

"Genesis device" - a missile that magically creates an oasis of flora and fauna literately out of ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, in a matter of minutes... No one flinches.

A starship designed to operate in vacuum and traverse huge distances by bending the very fabric of space gets submerged under water... "Blasphemy! Jihad! Behead the infidel!"

Trekkies <3

Yea. We can make Submarines today, and they don't seem to undergo the level of stress as launching a shuttle into orbit. Surely Traveling at Warp 9 or better has got to put more stress on a ship than being submerged in water???

[Enterprise is Great]

Trekmovie has more info on the second trailer and has news on a third trailer coming in early 2013

[teacake]

WARNING: Some Hobbit screenings will not have the Trek trailer

I'd just die if I went to see the Hobbit and didn't get to see the trailer.

[OneBuckFilms]

Aeolusdallas wrote:

---

Also in TOS they had an entire city floating on antigravity. They were impressed but not flabbergasted by it. Also in TNG they showed Galaxy class ships being build on Mars

Why didn't I think of Stratos?

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Considering there's a pretty big size difference between the two... Which is my problem, the Enterprise is huge, even the TOS Kirk Enterprise/Movie Enterprise. IIRC schematic put the Abrams Enterprise as bigger than the -D. Which is, scientifically speaking, 'Utterly Mother Fucking Huge!"

Nor is it the most aerodynamic shape, but the Enterprise should barely be able to not fall apart under its own weight in an atmosphere, let alone be underwater.

The holoship was the size of the entire Ba'ku village! And it was the shape of a brick!

The Enterprise is not some tin can in space. It goes faster than the speed of light, it flies through gas giants, space amoebas, nebulas. It falls into black holes, wormholes, black stars, gets hit by antimatter warheads almost routinely. And you think some H2O is beyond it's abilities?

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

Vektor wrote:

---

Except a lot of basic technology apparently took a giant leap backward in the Prime timeline subsequent to 2233 if everything was the same up until then. I don't just mean it didn't advance as quickly, it went backwards, i.e. graphical computer interfaces and touch-screen displays. Yes, of course this is merely the cinematic expression of a half-century difference between the making of TOS and the current movies, but if you want an in-universe way of explaining it, an earlier point of divergence might do it.

Plus I just think it would be cool if the NuTrek timeline was actually our own future, since the Prime timeline no longer can be.

I'll never get how some fans can accept a new Kirk and Spock but balk at the Enterprise herself being recast, so to speak. It's the same future through different eyes.

And we already got one unbelievable techonological hike explained away in-universe as a "refit" in 1979. This time the writers wave their hands and say "scans of Nero's ship"

[Photoman15]

Two words: Structural Integrity Field
With addition of Shields.

[Vektor]

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote:

---

I'll never get how some fans can accept a new Kirk and Spock but balk at the Enterprise herself being recast, so to speak. It's the same future through different eyes.

I'm not balking at anything. I might have made some different stylistic choices here and there but I'm basically fine with the "recasting" of the ship.

However, the entire plot of the last Trek film was built around the idea of rebooting the franchise while providing an in-universe rationalization for the reboot. I'm only doing the same thing, speculating that one explanation for all the other changes is that the timeline actually diverged from the Prime timeline a lot earlier than Nero. As I said, it's just a pet theory for my own amusement, but I think it's foolish for people to run around and declare absolutely that everything was exactly the same until Nero came along when that could go out the window with a single line of dialogue in the next movie. Not saying it will, but it could.

[Shazam!]

teacake wrote:

---

I'd just die if I went to see the Hobbit and didn't get to see the trailer.

LOL

[Amasov]

Another mashup has turned up.

[M'Sharak]

[Ovation]

M'Sharak wrote:

---

[SalvorHardin]

^ I love it.